ORDER : 1. The State has filed this petition under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C., seeking to cancel the bail granted to the respondent, by an order dated 17.10.2018 passed in Spl.Case No.67/2018 on the file Special Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar. 2. It is the case of the prosecution in brief that the complainant-grand mother of the victim, filed a complaint against respondent accused, on the basis of which, case was registered against respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 377 and 506 of IPC and Sections 4 and 5 of POCSO Act. 3. During the course of investigation, respondent-accused was arrested and he was remanded to judicial custody and after investigation, police filed charge-sheet for the aforesaid offences and the same is numbered in Special Case No.67/2018. Thereafter respondent filed the application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., seeking regular bail before the Special Court which was opposed by the prosecution. The Special Court after hearing both the sides, allowed the bail application by order dated 17.10.2018, subject to imposing condition Nos.1 to 4. 4. The State has stated that respondent has committed unnatural offence against minor boy and that while allowing bail petition, the same was not looked into by the trial Court and that trial Court has adopted liberal approach in granting bail. The offence under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act is made out and therefore adverse interference has to be drawn against respondent. Therefore the State has sought for cancellation of the bail application. 5. Heard the learned HCGP and the learned counsel for respondent. 6. It is seen from the record that immediately after registering of the case, respondent was arrested and he was remanded to the judicial custody and he was in custody till he was enlarged on bail by order dated 17.10.2018. It is also not disputed that respondent was granted bail only after filing charge-sheet and after giving opportunity to the prosecution by opposing the said application. Learned Special Judge after considering the material on record and relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Laxman Irappa Hatti and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2004 Cr.L.J. 3802 and also in the case of Hanamant Vs. Learned Special Judge after considering the material on record and relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Laxman Irappa Hatti and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2004 Cr.L.J. 3802 and also in the case of Hanamant Vs. State of Karnataka reported in 2016(2) KCCR 1560 has exercised his discretion and has granted regular bail to the respondent, subject to imposing stringent condition by virtue of condition No.4: “The accused shall mark his attendance bef ore the SHO of Bhatkal Rural police station on first and third Sunday of every month till conclusion of the examination of the victim.” Therefore the interest of the victim and the State is protected by imposing such stringent condition. There is no allegation of violation of any of the conditions imposed by the Special Court. 7. Under these circumstances, this Court holds that there are no grounds to cancel the bail granted to the respondent. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed.